Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 09:51:10 02/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2003 at 12:38:50, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On February 04, 2003 at 12:28:21, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >> >http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=memelist.html?m=4%23527 It is precisely in this area of applying pattern recognition to the crucial pruning decision that Deep Fritz has improved considerably over Deep Blue. Despite Deep Fritz having available only about 1.3% as much brute force computation, it plays chess at about the same level because of its superior pattern-recognition-based pruning algorithm. So chess software has made significant gains. Deep Fritz has only slightly more computation available than CMU's Deep Thought, yet is rated almost 400 points higher. >> >> >> >>Computers are currently only faster in very specific repetitive actions, like >>number crunching. It just so happens that chess moves can be reduced down to >>that sort of situation. >> >>In general, grandmasters actually only seriously examine a few moves in great >>depth, as their brains allow them to recognize inferior moves very easily via >>pattern recognition and experience. A computer on the other hand, does a >>brute-force analysis of trees of thousands or millions of moves, giving a score >>to each and then determining which is the best. >> >>Comparing the processing power of a human brain to a chess program in this >>situation is just ludicrous, though. Whereas the chess program is just analyzing >>moves, the human is also processing vast amounts of sensual information (sounds >>nearby, where the pieces on the board are visually, etc.) as well as a myriad of >>other functions (maintaining the balance of the body, breathing, processing >>food, etc). I'll be much more impressed when a robot can sit down, process the >>board visually, move the pieces itself, and so on, without humans having to feed >>moves into it via keyboard or sensors on the chess board, but even that will be >>a huge leap from what the human brain is doing all the time. Our brains are >>excellent at things that computers are terrible at and computers are excellent >>at things our brains are terrible at. Someday, I'm sure, computers will become >>as good at those things as we are, and along the way, we'll have developed an >>enormous understanding of how our brains actually work, but right now, this is a >>drop of water in an ocean. >> >>As several grandmasters have already lost several games to various computer >>programs, the first prediction of Kurzweil seems definite. But to think that >>people will lose interest just because computers can beat the grandmasters makes >>no sense at all. Most people are already more than matched in skill by chess >>software running on a decent cpu, but we're still playing, and we'll keep doing >>it. - > >by Belandrew
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.